Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: capabilities in elf headers, (my) final (and shortest) iteration | Date | Mon, 19 Apr 1999 16:18:26 -0400 | From | Horst von Brand <> |
| |
Riley Williams <rhw@BigFoot.Com> said: > >>> ...and works only for some types of files (how about a webserver > >>> written in Perl?).
[...]
> {Shrug} Perhaps somebody can suggest some way that capabilities can > have meaning for a script, any script if it comes to that?
A script in Unix is just another random way to write a program that does what I want. Nothing special there. Note that today's scripts are (almost) undistinguishable from binary, compiled programs: They may carry the same permissions (execute permissions for whom, even S[UG]ID bits (not on all Unices, but several honor them)). If some scheme can't do the same (at least in principle) for capabilities, it is fundamentally flawed. No "all capable" interpreter should be needed, as this is a _huge_ security risk, the kernel might as well endow this particular process with the requested capabilities, and nothing else. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |